Canon EOS R100 specifications, which is possibly Canon’s next camera to be announced [CR1]

I started with DSLRs in 2009, a few months before the 7D launched. It would have been outside of my self-imposed total budget of $2500, which I set because I wasn’t sure if photography would become a serious hobby for me (clearly, it did).

Knowing from my film SLR days two decades earlier that glass was more important than body, I bought the Rebel T1i/500D but skipped the kit lens, instead getting the EF-S 17-55/2.8 and the EF 85/1.8, along with a 430EX II flash and a Manfrotto carbon fiber tripod and ballhead to round out the budget.
I started in 2011 and my budget was £100! It was either a secondhand DSLR or a fixed lens superzoom. How different my life could have been had I chosen the latter... I was blown away by the image quality of my 300D and kit lens.

Like others above, I too later coveted the 5D (mark 2 at that point). Eventually getting a 5D3 was a dream come true - and it gave me years of good service in return. But if you'd told me at the start I'd be spending that kind of money on a camera one day, I wouldn't have believed it.
 
Upvote 0
I agree, on introduction, the 7D had a bundle option for the EF24-104L mk1, which I bought to upgrade from a 20D. While that bundle was a good deal and the 7D was a lot of camera for the money, it was 3-4x the price of a rebel + EF-S 18-55 kit.
Strangely enough, the EF24-105/4L was not "bundled". It looked like it had been stripped from another bundle (5D?) and added as there was no box for it.
Second lens was a second hand EF-s 10-22mm and I was hooked for life.
I am constantly surprised about how much information I needed to learn over a decade to get to where I am today.
 
Upvote 0
Canon always have and will continue to treat APS-C like a second-class citizen, giving customers just enough to scrape by while dangling the full-frame carrot in front of them. It happened with EF-S (three prime lenses in over 20 years and nothing faster than f/2.8) and EF-M (only eight lenses, three primes) and now RF-S which released with a pitiable kit lens which manages to be slower and have a narrower zoom range than the EF-M equivalent.

Yeah it is a bit sad, but I ended up choosing full-frame anyway. For people serious about crop sensor kits, there's always Fujifilm.
Canon, unlike so many forum dwellers, isn't stupid. They understand that most photographers (not gear heads) have no need to duplicate systems. If you have 50 lenses in the EF system, for example ( I don't know the actual number) it would have been, in my opinion, a huge money losing undertaking for them to duplicate the same lenses for the crop EF-S system. So they made enough lenses for their crop systems to cover all that is needed. For photographers that wanted more, they bought EF lenses and put them on their crop cameras. They had and have no problem doing so. I've been doing photography for 40 years plus. Not a pro, but serious enough to sell some photos at street fairs. In 40 years, I have never needed more than a wide angle zoom, a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom. If I did portraits, yes, I would probably get an 85mm prime or some other fast lens. My guess is most non-forum dwellers need little more - maybe one or two other lenses if they have specialty needs. So the M system has enough lenses. The EF-S system has enough lenses. And what they don't have, all you need is an adapter to use the EF lens. Over time, the situation will be the same for the RF system. It is sad if your objective is to collect lenses. Or to show your friends your new lenses. If you visit some of the Facebook camera groups, you'll see that regular folks have no problems getting numerous EF lenses for their new R7 crop cameras. And are also buying the RF 24-240, either of the RF 24-105's, the RF 100-400 is very popular as is the RF 100-500. They are finding what they both want and need without whining and crying like babies like so many forum dwellers. For folks who are getting sick and tired of Canon Rumors becoming Canon Whiners, there are other places where can go to actually discuss and ask questions about Canon gear that you actually like to use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Canon, unlike so many forum dwellers, isn't stupid. They understand that most photographers (not gear heads) have no need to duplicate systems. If you have 50 lenses in the EF system, for example ( I don't know the actual number) it would have been, in my opinion, a huge money losing undertaking for them to duplicate the same lenses for the crop EF-S system. So they made enough lenses for their crop systems to cover all that is needed. For photographers that wanted more, they bought EF lenses and put them on their crop cameras. They had and have no problem doing so.

I'm an APS-C user and I agree that I've never had a problem using the full frame EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, EF 200mm f/2.8 and EF 70-300mm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Canon, unlike so many forum dwellers, isn't stupid. They understand that most photographers (not gear heads) have no need to duplicate systems. If you have 50 lenses in the EF system, for example ( I don't know the actual number) it would have been, in my opinion, a huge money losing undertaking for them to duplicate the same lenses for the crop EF-S system. So they made enough lenses for their crop systems to cover all that is needed. For photographers that wanted more, they bought EF lenses and put them on their crop cameras. They had and have no problem doing so. I've been doing photography for 40 years plus. Not a pro, but serious enough to sell some photos at street fairs. In 40 years, I have never needed more than a wide angle zoom, a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom. If I did portraits, yes, I would probably get an 85mm prime or some other fast lens. My guess is most non-forum dwellers need little more - maybe one or two other lenses if they have specialty needs. So the M system has enough lenses. The EF-S system has enough lenses. And what they don't have, all you need is an adapter to use the EF lens. Over time, the situation will be the same for the RF system. It is sad if your objective is to collect lenses. Or to show your friends your new lenses. If you visit some of the Facebook camera groups, you'll see that regular folks have no problems getting numerous EF lenses for their new R7 crop cameras. And are also buying the RF 24-240, either of the RF 24-105's, the RF 100-400 is very popular as is the RF 100-500. They are finding what they both want and need without whining and crying like babies like so many forum dwellers. For folks who are getting sick and tired of Canon Rumors becoming Canon Whiners, there are other places where can go to actually discuss and ask questions about Canon gear that you actually like to use.
I recently saw a review of the R7 saying ‘The R7 only has 2 lenses available’. Hilarious!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
The Canon EOS M6 Mark II was officially discontinued by Canon Australia quite a few months ago and dealers can not order any stock because it's listed as a "deleted product line", so I reckon it's ridgey-didge gone for good. Other countries can't be too far behind as stocks deplete. M6 fans will have to accept the M system is going the way of the FD mount, and the good old faithful EF system is on the way out too. I really wish SIGMA would throw some RF mount lenses on the market to shake things up.

"A few months ago" and "long discontinued" are not exactly the same thing.
For me, "long discontinued" would mean sometime well before 2019, which is the year the M6 mark II was launched.
 
Upvote 0
Canon, unlike so many forum dwellers, isn't stupid. They understand that most photographers (not gear heads) have no need to duplicate systems. If you have 50 lenses in the EF system, for example ( I don't know the actual number) it would have been, in my opinion, a huge money losing undertaking for them to duplicate the same lenses for the crop EF-S system. So they made enough lenses for their crop systems to cover all that is needed. For photographers that wanted more, they bought EF lenses and put them on their crop cameras. They had and have no problem doing so. I've been doing photography for 40 years plus. Not a pro, but serious enough to sell some photos at street fairs. In 40 years, I have never needed more than a wide angle zoom, a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom. If I did portraits, yes, I would probably get an 85mm prime or some other fast lens. My guess is most non-forum dwellers need little more - maybe one or two other lenses if they have specialty needs. So the M system has enough lenses. The EF-S system has enough lenses. And what they don't have, all you need is an adapter to use the EF lens. Over time, the situation will be the same for the RF system. It is sad if your objective is to collect lenses. Or to show your friends your new lenses. If you visit some of the Facebook camera groups, you'll see that regular folks have no problems getting numerous EF lenses for their new R7 crop cameras. And are also buying the RF 24-240, either of the RF 24-105's, the RF 100-400 is very popular as is the RF 100-500. They are finding what they both want and need without whining and crying like babies like so many forum dwellers. For folks who are getting sick and tired of Canon Rumors becoming Canon Whiners, there are other places where can go to actually discuss and ask questions about Canon gear that you actually like to use.
For my Rebel I bought the EF 50mm f/1.4 mainly for portraits. It’s field of view was equivalent to FF 80mm. The 85mm would be good for those who like to use 135mm FF for portraits. For EF-S lenses, all most of us need are reasonably priced wide angle lenses. I bought the EF-S 10mm–22mm lens. That was before a smaller and cheaper wide angle zoom came out. I used that lens to shoot interior shots for a realtor, so it was the last lens in my arsenal to pay for itself, so to speak. For other uses, I accumulated over time a few EF lenses, including the 100mm macro. They work perfectly with no adaptor. The only thing to notice is which color dot to go by when attaching the lens. And of course when I bought the 6D2, I already had a few lenses beyond the kit zoom I got with the camera. All I really needed to add were the wide angle and telephoto zooms. I didn’t care for the look of portraits shot with the 100mm, so I bought a refurbed 85 f/1.8, which was cheap and does a great job for its intended use.
 
Upvote 0
M has nice 22mm, 28mm/macro (Both are nice, inexpensive) and Sigma 16, 30 and 56 all AF. Where are the wide angle 1.8 AF RF-S????? Only 16mm FF, 2.8.
patience-jaffar.gif

The M system launched with just two lenses in 2012, the EF-M 18-55 and the EF-M 22/2. The M11-22 came out the following year, the M55-200 another year later, then they replaced the kit lens with the M15-45 in 2015, then the M-18-150 and M28 macro came out in 2016, four years after the system launched.

The RF-S lenses started with two lenses this year, a standard kit zoom and the 18-150, probably because the EF-M 18-150 was more popular than the EF-M prime lenses. Assuming Canon is including the RF-S lenses in their count of 8 forthcoming lenses per year, I'd expect one RF-S lens per year starting next year, and next year's lens will probably be the UWA zoom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I am supprise that Canon did not make 15-45 as the RF_S first kit lens. For me, the 15-45 is more useful than the 18-45.
The flange focal distance of the EF-M mount is 18mm, meaning a 15mm lens can be made without needing a retrofocal design (the EF-M 15-45, for example). The 20mm flange focal distance of the RF mount precludes a non-retrofocal 15mm lens. That doesn't mean a 15-45mm zoom can't be made for it, just that the design would need to be retrofocal and thus I believe an RF-S 15-45 would have been a much more expensive lens, too expensive as a viable kit lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
View attachment 205880

The M system launched with just two lenses in 2012, the EF-M 18-55 and the EF-M 22/2. The M11-22 came out the following year, the M55-200 another year later, then they replaced the kit lens with the M15-45 in 2015, then the M-18-150 and M28 macro came out in 2016, four years after the system launched.

The RF-S lenses started with two lenses this year, a standard kit zoom and the 18-150, probably because the EF-M 18-150 was more popular than the EF-M prime lenses. Assuming Canon is including the RF-S lenses in their count of 8 forthcoming lenses per year, I'd expect one RF-S lens per year starting next year, and next year's lens will probably be the UWA zoom.
Thanks for taking the time to explain the history. I had no idea they spaced out M lens over 4 years like that, so most demand must have ended with the kit lens for most consumers, right? I am in a weird spot, can use a smartphone for snapshots last few years, but recently decided to get a M50 and haven't really followed Canon since the 1990's, just great 110 elph and several SX pocket cameras since then and was shocked after buying the M50 to find out from you guys posting here that the M mount is an orphan product with no future siblings. Highly discouraging to me as I really like the small size, weight and price is excellent, hoping they would continue with faster lens (Sigma has M's for how much longer?) and even though Canon's official video on R7/10 release stated differently about still selling it, they are moving to the R mount on newer small cameras like this R100.

I recall my Uncle bought in Japan on a vacation a really small SLR in early 70's, likely a similar sized film SLR equal size or less than M50 but no idea of which brand Mamiya or other. My father took it on a long backpacking trip with us, unlike any normal sized SLR of the day, super convenient. Small cameras make it easy to use as a non-pro like myself.
 
Upvote 0
hoping they would continue with faster lens
You may be missing the point. M has all the lenses it needs because M lenses are required to be a specific diameter (60.9mm). They are compact to match the compact camera. If you want a faster lens, use one of the hundreds of EF or EF-S with your M as these don't have that limitation. You then won't have a compact system though, because the fast lens will be way bigger than the camera. If you moved to RF mount you'd have the exact same issue, small RF-S lenses will be limited by size and the larger RF lenses will be larger. Just because the lenses don't need a converter, the problem doesn't change. Small lenses have limitations because they are small, and large lenses without those limitations are large. Your M50 will last many years, buy the EF, EF-s and EF-m lenses you want and enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I recall my Uncle bought in Japan on a vacation a really small SLR in early 70's, likely a similar sized film SLR equal size or less than M50 but no idea of which brand Mamiya or other. My father took it on a long backpacking trip with us, unlike any normal sized SLR of the day, super convenient. Small cameras make it easy to use as a non-pro like myself.
The original Olympus OM-1??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I recall my Uncle bought in Japan on a vacation a really small SLR in early 70's, likely a similar sized film SLR equal size or less than M50 but no idea of which brand Mamiya or other. My father took it on a long backpacking trip with us, unlike any normal sized SLR of the day, super convenient. Small cameras make it easy to use as a non-pro like myself.
I’m always surprised at how small SLRs were in general compared to DSLRs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Yes, yes...Canon is d00med. Where have I heard that before? In any case, welcome to the ranks of those who've been predicting Canon's d00m here on CR forum for well over a decade. I think you guys really need a logo, this one seems appropriate.

View attachment 205798
I think you gotta head of yourself! I never said Canon were doomed, never said I’m jumping ship (I’m not) I’m merely suggesting there are areas Canon needs to catch up on.
 
Upvote 0
The original Olympus OM-1??
The 5.6" width seems about right. It was larger than my cigarette pack 110 or SX750 and I don't recall a shoe on the top. Today looking at some really nice YT videos, I discovered the Mamiya Sekor model I used in high school, it was a 500DTL. But don't recall the SLR make or model from 73' I used for Jr Hi yearbook schools camera we shared. The Lens-db website I saw too, what nice resources some people have compiled!
 
Upvote 0
You may be missing the point. M has all the lenses it needs because M lenses are required to be a specific diameter (60.9mm). They are compact to match the compact camera. If you want a faster lens, use one of the hundreds of EF or EF-S with your M as these don't have that limitation. You then won't have a compact system though, because the fast lens will be way bigger than the camera. If you moved to RF mount you'd have the exact same issue, small RF-S lenses will be limited by size and the larger RF lenses will be larger. Just because the lenses don't need a converter, the problem doesn't change. Small lenses have limitations because they are small, and large lenses without those limitations are large. Your M50 will last many years, buy the EF, EF-s and EF-m lenses you want and enjoy it.
I do have the $250 EF to EF-M adapter. The 20D lens stuff I bought used has what I discovered are not greatest lens as far as speed and value. The 17-85 EF-S F4-5.6, 75-300 EF F4-5.6 seem to rated low resale value, but the EF 100mm 2.8 macro is the best of the (3). They all are like gigantic imbalanced lens on the M50 though. I bought the 50 F1.8 stm new recently. I love the EF-M 22 F2 and EF-M 28mm Macro both I really like. I haven't decided on the Sigma EF-M 16mm F 1.4 yet. I am stuck, all I know is I don't have $1500-2000 for a large FF fast prime! I love the M50 and still thinking of buying another one at $700 as a back up before they disappear but feel the dead end. The online stores say "close out" now on EF-M sigmas. I have waited on R10, and got the Sony A6400 with newest 11mm F 1.8, instead for now but the menu's suck.
kI’m always surprised at how small SLRs were in general compared to DSLRs.
The circuit boards on the 20D I noticed are stuffed in and ribbon cables remind me of laptops, a nightmare not to repair yourself.
 
Upvote 0
The flange focal distance of the EF-M mount is 18mm, meaning a 15mm lens can be made without needing a retrofocal design (the EF-M 15-45, for example). The 20mm flange focal distance of the RF mount precludes a non-retrofocal 15mm lens. That doesn't mean a 15-45mm zoom can't be made for it, just that the design would need to be retrofocal and thus I believe an RF-S 15-45 would have been a much more expensive lens, too expensive as a viable kit lens.

Looking at the block diagram of the EF-M 15-45mm with a negative front group and two positive back elements, it's fairly obvious that the lens has a retrofocus design.

ef453-lens-construction.png

Other than the lower complexity of the front group (probably due to the recent increased acceptability of post image capture distortion correction), it's a design similar to the various EF-S 18-55mm lenses.

ef394-lens-construction.gif


That's not to say that it can't be done, because it certainly can, but Canon didn't do it with the EF-M 15-45mm.

The registration distance is not as critical for MILCs as it was for SLRs, as the rear of the lens can protrude into the light box of the camera without concern for mirror clearance issues. It's entirely possible to make a non-retrofocus 15mm lens that fits on an EOS-M with 18mm registration distance as long as one is willing to allow many of the lens' optical elements to be positioned behind the flange. This does constrain the design in terms of the allowable diameters of the lens elements behind the flange, which could affect edge performance due to the angles involved between the rear element and the edges/corners of the sensor. But with a smaller APS-C sensor, this is less of a concern than with a full frame camera having the same or similar registration distance and throat diameter, both in terms of the angle of light rays from the rear element to the sensor and in terms of the angle of view from which the front of the lens needs to collect light.

Having said all of that, it's not impossible to make a non-retrofocus design 15mm lens for the RF mount with a 20mm registration distance. It's just more difficult and a theoretical maximum possible performance would be less than for a similar EF-M 15mm lens. The larger 54mm throat diameter of the RF mount vs. the 47mm throat diameter of the EF-M mount would help some in that respect. But the difference in diameter of the image circle needed (≈43.5mm vs. ≈26.9mm) would more than offset the throat diameter advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Looking at the block diagram of the EF-M 15-45mm with a negative front group and two positive back elements, it's fairly obvious that the lens has a retrofocus design.

ef453-lens-construction.png

Other than the lower complexity of the front group (probably due to the recent increased acceptability of post image capture distortion correction), it's a design similar to the various EF-S 18-55mm lenses.

ef394-lens-construction.gif


That's not to say that it can't be done, because it certainly can, but Canon didn't do it with the EF-M 15-45mm.

The registration distance is not as critical for MILCs as it was for SLRs, as the rear of the lens can protrude into the light box of the camera without concern for mirror clearance issues. It's entirely possible to make a non-retrofocus 15mm lens that fits on an EOS-M with 18mm registration distance as long as one is willing to allow many of the lens' optical elements to be positioned behind the flange. This does constrain the design in terms of the allowable diameters of the lens elements behind the flange, which could affect edge performance due to the angles involved between the rear element and the edges/corners of the sensor. But with a smaller APS-C sensor, this is less of a concern than with a full frame camera having the same or similar registration distance and throat diameter, both in terms of the angle of light rays from the rear element to the sensor and in terms of the angle of view from which the front of the lens needs to collect light.

Having said all of that, it's not impossible to make a non-retrofocus design 15mm lens for the RF mount with a 20mm registration distance. It's just more difficult and a theoretical maximum possible performance would be less than for a similar EF-M 15mm lens. The larger 54mm throat diameter of the RF mount vs. the 47mm throat diameter of the EF-M mount would help some in that respect. But the difference in diameter of the image circle needed (≈43.5mm vs. ≈26.9mm) would more than offset the throat diameter advantage.
Thanks for correcting my error.

If that’s the case, I really wonder why Canon opted to make the RF-S 18-45mm, instead of the ‘classic’ 18-55mm APS-C kit zoom or a 15-45mm design like the updated M kit lens (which IMO is a more useful walkaround range on APS-C)?

The answer that comes to mind is to encourage crop R kit lens owners to buy more lenses to expand that limited focal range. That sounds Canon-like…
 
Upvote 0